Anonymous Poacher Taunts Idaho Wildlife Agents From Everett

WTF?

The letter reads in part: “Here is a picture of the nice buck I poached up in northern Idaho this year. & I plan to do all my Idaho hunting like this from now on. & I’ll send a picture of my nice pronghorn next. Also my turkey.”

He’s sending a message! If you read the Hunting sites, Idaho has made the prices way to high for a lot of people who used to hunt from outta state. I read (don’t know for fact) Idaho F&G lost over 6 million this year in out of state sales due to Prices and fear Wolves have killed of so much game!

I think saying Idaho “lost” 6 million is a misnomer, you can’t loose something you never had, there are a lot of factors to contribute to revenue for state game agencies, and there are a lot of factors contributing to lost revenue in the last couple of years..Idaho’s prices are not any higher than other states that have non-resident hunting licenses, we have a major recession/depression going on right now and people don’t have the disposable income they have had in the past..despite what the hunting sites are saying.

Here in Montana, we are having an ok hunting season, some areas are up and some areas are down..

Idaho had a huge Tag fee increase last year which hurt out of State tag sales in a big way! I said, I Didn’t know for sure just what I read about 6 million lose but I wouldn’t be surprised! Have you checked Idaho Deer/Elk Tags OTC against Montana,Wyoming,Colarado,Utah? I’m sure this idiot is doing this because of the fee’s or the Wolf BS. I read a lot of Hunting sites and the fee hikes and Wolf fears are at a all time high! Especially since the last malloy ruling! You need to read every State Forum, Elk Forum,Mule Deer,Antelope,Whitetail forum, on about 5 or 6 sites and you’ll get an idea about what I’m saying. I’m just telling you what I read and what is contributing to this not because of me but what is posted on these sites! Idaho has no game left, Wolves have decimated the herds and there is no reason to come here to hunt! Spend about 3 or 4 hours a night reading these sites and you will see what I mean.

As with this blog, I make the rounds every single day, and the hunting sites are full of people that very little concept of what is going on…you can choose to believe them, I after several years of doing this and living in the affected ares prefer to look at the hard science behind all of this.

And don’t get me wrong, I am in favor of the wolves being delisted and I believe the ESA is being abused by certain parties. But I choose to look at the science and not the uninformed speculations that is so prevalent now a days..

Just right around my home, I know of 17 trophy sized bucks, 9 trophy sized elk and several other animals that have been taken since the beginning of hunting season..

As I said, as with years past, numbers are down in certain areas like the Bitterroot and they are strong in other areas…the numbers are simply not showing that the wolves are the major cost of lost hunting opportunities..look at the science and hard numbers instead of the rhetoric that some are spewing..I have talked to many of my friends at FWP that I used to work with when I was with the agency, and they are showing numbers that are actually not bad…

Funny that a guy would take the risk of getting busted poaching in a state that supposedly has no deer or elk left. Doesn’t really add up…perhaps the hysteria is just that, and there actually is some hunting opportunity still?

Based on what I have read, and heard, I am suspect that this is just a grandstand attempt to bring attention to something this person feels passionate about…I suspect that there has been no poaching going on, but I am sure he/she is enjoying the press it is now getting..

“just a grandstand attempt to bring attention to something this person feels passionate about…I suspect that there has been no poaching going on, but I am sure he/she is enjoying the press it is now getting..”

EXACTALLY what I said in my first post, he’s just trying to piss the F&G off about tag fees ect!

I think the most common “serial poachers” are those who live in the country and can kill deer or elk on or near their own land. Some do this on a yearly basis and never tell anyone or draw any attention to it. I’ve known some families who poach every year and have done so for generations.

Another photo and a interesting discussion about the issue here,
It would be interesting to have a copy of the original digital photos to see if the EXIF information provided us with a date & time and if the two pictures had the same make of camera.

HAMILTON — A 45-year-old Darby man convicted of poaching elk, deer and moose over the past four years has been ordered to pay just over $9,000 in fines and restitution and has lost his hunting and fishing privileges for life.

Mark Thornton was sentenced Wednesday by District Judge Jeffrey Langton in Hamilton for unlawful possession of game animals and unlawful possession of a moose.

Prosecutors say some of the animals, including a moose and her calf, were shot from a porch after being lured by bait.

The Ravalli Republic reports Thornton told investigators he killed the animals on public land to feed his family.

Last week, Langton sentenced Thornton’s 37-year-old co-defendant Chad Moen to 30 days in jail, ordered him to pay $6,000 in restitution and revoked his hunting and fishing privileges for life.

I remember in 1965, my father had drawn a moose and goat tag in the Darby area. We talked with lots of hunters and people who lived in the area and where told that moose were shot with or without a tag. The local people had no money and they fed themselves with wild game and gardens.

Your theory is nothing but a pipe dream. Wyoming’s population has increased during the last decade, all the while gasoline prices have increased over 300 percent during the same time. If your theory were true, Wyoming’s “rural riff-raff” would have decreased during that time.

Let us also not forget the little fact that if gasoline prices were that high, it would be because the price of oil per barrel, would be also very high. This in turn would increase drilling for natural gas and oil in the western states, which in turn would further increase the population in these states.

Save Bears is correct, poaching would increase if gasoline were to hit $10 dollars per barrell. Simply due to population increases and economic hardships on the people.

Or…..maybe some who poach for food (or profitable sale of poached trophy animals) will still choose to live in rural areas and just poach more to make up the difference. And, it just might cause others who obey wildlife laws now to take up poaching to close the gap caused by higher gas prices. Did you think of that Mike?

I am not arguing about gas prices being tied to inflation, in fact I agree with you.

However Mike is assuming that gasoline priced at $10 dollars wouldn’t fall under the same economic conditions as present day prices.

People adjust their lifestyles, pay, etc, to accomodate for inflation. They have in the past and will continue to in the future. No one will be moving to Mike’s urban utopia just because gasoline will be $10 a gallon.

In 1970, I graduated from high school and was working as labor in Yellowstone National Park, my pay was $2.88 an hour, and gas was about .29 to .31 cents a gallon. My father and I purchased a 1964 VW bug with a 10 gallon gas tank. It cost $3.00 to fill up the bug or one hour of work.

Today a labor in Yellowstone National Park earns about $18.00 an hour, and gas is about $3.00 an hour. So in 1970 one hour of work purchased 10 gallons of gas and today one hour of work purchases 6 gallons of gas.

I think that it was better in the olden days. Plus, today one has to have a cell phone, computer, Internet connection, and many other things that were futuristic in those days.

WYo – I agree with you that a spike in energy prices won’t force people “back to the cities.” Especially if one never came from a city in the first place.

I think the economic downturn led to a lot of repo’d pickups and other motorized toys, which has led to a downturn in hunting. Higher fuel prices may keep urban-suburban people home, too, but I don’t think it will do a lot to move rural people to metro areas.

I don’t care what gas sells for, I would not move back to the city or urban environment, I produce most of my own power these days in fact I got a large credit on the electric bill last month because my systems generated more power than I consumed.

Mike seems to forget that people were self sufficient before gas came along and if they can’t afford it, they will become self sufficient again..I know for a fact that many of the people I know, can and do live with very little intervention from modern convinces…

My definition includes poachers who live near public land, usually on a couple acres filled with rusting vehicles, four wheelers, trucks worth more than their house, more ammo in the pantry than food, etc.

I’ve come across many of these people – especially near the national forests of the Yellowstone ecosystem, the outskirts of Kalispell, and more recently around the Sawtooth area in Idaho.

Higher gas prices means less fuel for their quads, trucks and so forth. Which means less poking around in the backcountry looking to shoot anything that walks for their own demented pleasure.

Hey, I’ve got time SB. There are alot of good reasons why “riff-raff” like you and I (and a few others) according to Mike, aren’t gonna just head back to the cities, even if the gas prices get unrealistic.